Obama: Anger isn't governing strategy

[cybok0]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/finance/20090322/Obama.Economy/

[vurbano]

but I guess fear is?

[stevenl]

fear worked for the previous administration. You guys were willing to give up the constitution in name of fear.

[vurbano]

fear worked for the previous administration. You guys were willing to give up the constitution in name of fear.
The constitution was never given up.

[cybok0]

The constitution was never given up.

But certain human rights were like phone tapping.

[Bear Paws]

But certain human rights were like phone tapping.
You can't keep equivocating and justifying everything your boy does by saying "well so and so did this or did that too". If one was bad for you once then stop doubling down on something even worse. It makes you look inconsistent, childish, and cheaply reactive, as in.. Jerk (knee)...flap (lip).. Jerk...flap..

Lets clear this up.... Telephones are not a human right. Nor is Talking on one. Its only protected speech in the regard you can say what ever you want through it...
There is no expectation of privacy on public air ways or phone lines if you exercise the right to free speech. You can't have one right with out the other being given up as if the conversation was held within the strict confines of your own house.. Its not a one way dead end street.

Speaking on a phone is protected under the 1st Amendment free speech clause. If that is true then anything you say can be public knowledge because although the conversation presumably often originates on private property, it is disseminated across public phone lines and/or airways to everywhere and to whomever is listening...or not.. ... Its the same as shouting to your neighbor over the fence. Three houses down the street.

The fact that there was a law created outside the Constitution against "splicing" into a private phone with out due cause and listening in on a conversation is too broad, because telephones lines are a public utility as is the internet or air ways IE cell phones. Also.. How does it cover party lines?

Now.... who "tapped" phones? THe fact that conversations where listened to by a computer for key words or by humans for that matter, that where being propagated over public air ways that originating from a foreign and often enemy or hostile territory, hardly constitutes "tapping" or splicing into a phone line. Its been reapproved by your congress and heard by the Supreme Court and found to be completely Constitutional..:026: No one had a "wire" running to your house phone to listen in on your phone sex if that is your concern.

[Skyhi]

Not sure where you're getting your information....

Here's an excerpt from a recent 6th Circuit case:

Two amici curiae convincingly analogize the privacy interest that e-mail users hold in the
content of their e-mails to the privacy interest in the content of telephone calls, recognized by the Supreme Court in its line of cases involving government eavesdropping on telephone conversations. See Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979); Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967); Berger v.New York, 388 U.S. 41 (1967). In Berger and Katz, telephone surveillance that intercepted the content of a conversation was held to constitute a search, because the caller “is surely entitled to assume that the words he utters into the mouthpiece will not be broadcast to the world,” and therefore cannot be said to have forfeited his privacy right in the conversation. Katz, 389 U.S. at 352. This is so even though “[t]he telephone conversation itself must be electronically transmitted by telephone company equipment, and may be recorded or overheard by the use of other company equipment.” Smith, 442 U.S. at 746 (Stewart, J., dissenting). On the other hand, in Smith, the Court ruled that the use of pen register, installed at the phone company’s facility to record the numbers dialed by the telephone user, did not amount to a search. This distinction was due to the fact that “a pen register differs significantly from the listening device employed in Katz, for pen registers do not acquire the contents of communications.”

[Bear Paws]

It was my opinion..
The out of country over public airwaves was a separate case and found perfectly legal. The new law, called the Protect America Act, allows the U.S. National Security Agency to intercept telephone conversations, e-mail and other communications between foreigners that are routed through American equipment. Should a U.S. resident become a target of such an investigation, court approval still will be required. Written and passed by Congress. Democratic Congress. 2006.

THe "friend of the court" brief was describing a ruling on repeating or "broadcasting" to the world. There is no law that says you can't listen in on a conversation. Just that you can't disseminate it nor use it as evidence with out legal authority.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2511.html

[Carl]

fear worked for the previous administration. You guys were willing to give up the constitution in name of fear.

:thumbup::thumbup:

[vurbano]

It was my opinion..
The out of country over public airwaves was a separate case and found perfectly legal. The new law, called the Protect America Act, allows the U.S. National Security Agency to intercept telephone conversations, e-mail and other communications between foreigners that are routed through American equipment. Should a U.S. resident become a target of such an investigation, court approval still will be required. Written and passed by Congress. Democratic Congress. 2006.

THe "friend of the court" brief was describing a ruling on repeating or "broadcasting" to the world. There is no law that says you can't listen in on a conversation. Just that you can't disseminate it nor use it as evidence with out legal authority.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2511.html:thumbup::thumbup: Give it up Bear. These muslim terrorist supporters would rather see 3000 americans blown up every damn day as opposed to some wrong headed percieved invasion of their rights. Is amazing that they will sit and pound on this vague area and at the same time give the messiah card Blanshe to sell the country down the river and institute socialist/communist policies that will take away EVERY right they have ever had. The stupidity is mind boggling.